Top performers in Europe were Ireland and UK

French and German stock markets fell twice as far as British shares

Greece leads the fallers with a 60 per cent loss

You don't need the experts to tell you that 2011 was a bad year to invest in stock markets.

A series of events rocked confidence over the year, starting with the
Arab spring, then the tsunami in Japan and culminating with the seismic
events surrounding the eurozone debt crisis since the summer.

It was the last of these that triggered the biggest sell-off.

Nail-biter: Traders such as this one in Germany have seen a turbulent 2011

How the world's stock market performed in 2011 (figures to 15 December)

But figures published today by financial information provider S&P Indices set out the grim reality of how those events have battered the wealth of investors.

Its number-crunching on the world's major markets shows ALL lost money in 2011 - a rare event in investing.

The Greek stock market, unsurprisingly, led the fallers, losing 60 per cent.

The country's woeful debt problem came to a head over the summer and required the European Union to organise a rescue package for its economy to prevent bankruptcy.

But even strong economies on the Continent have disappointed investors. Germany, which has manageable debts and a dynamic industrial base, saw its shares fall 23 per cent.

Even Sweden and Norway, which have been heralded for their strength during the crisis, lost nearly 25 per cent for investors.

The UK stock market, in stark contrast, lost only 11 per cent, ranking it ninth in the list.

The FTSE 100 fluctuated between a low of 4,944 and a high of 6,091 during the year.

Emerging markets, hailed as the new hope for adventurous investors, only managed a mixed performance with many of the new Goliaths lagging Britain: China lost 22 per cent while Brazil was down 26 per cent.

But the top performer was Indonesia, which lost only 1 per cent, followed by Thailand.

The U.S. also put in a strong performance, with its shares falling just 4.6 per cent.

Both America and the UK have led the world in terms of stimulating their economies.

The programme of electronic money printing ordered by the Bank of England, known as quantitative easing has been particularly aggressive. An initial £200billion of money printing concluded last year was followed by a further splurge of £75billion in October this year.

Investors tend to applaud such actions as money printing, while creating inflationary pressure, reduces borrowing costs and tends to pep up stock markets.

The European Central Bank has so far - and due to being blocked by the German government - refused to print money.

Jeremy Thomas, chief investment officer at fund manager RCM, said the UK had performed relatively well because the economy is 'relatively open' to the global market and has had the benefit of being able to devalue its currency.

The sharp fall in sterling in 2009 and 2010 made UK goods effectively cheaper to foreign markets, boosting British exporting companies.

But Thomas added: 'The economy has considerable trade and financial linkages with the eurozone which is likely to be a further negative influence on confidence.

'It seems likely that the UK economy will flirt with recession throughout 2012 and the Bank of England will attempt to offset this via a rolling programme of quantitative easing.

'Beyond the UK, the global environment is also highly uncertain.'

Rocky road: The FTSE 100 in 2011, plunging in spring but with a bigger fall at the outbreak of the eurozone crisis in July

How cheap is the UK stock market?

Experts use various methods to value stock markets. The most popular is comparing the total value of the market against the profits made by the companies listed on it. This is known as a price-to-earnings ratio - the lower, the better.

Broker Charles Stanley currently values the UK stock market on a modest at 9.2, based on the estimate earnings of companies for 2012.

In theory, that's cheap given that the long-term average is closer to 15. However, the problem with p/e ratios is that they rely on brokers' estimates of the profits that will be made in the future - they could be woefully wrong, especially if the economy is weaker than expected. And the long-term average can also be distorted.

What next?: Traders are less than bullish about 2012 (AP Photo/Michael Probst)

Another measure is the average yield, the amount being paid out as income by companies relative to the cost of buying their shares. A typical yield for UK shares has been around 3.5 per cent. Charles Stanley again puts this at a favourable 4 per cent.

When this yield drops below the level of income paid on government bonds, called gilts, it is also seen as a rare signal and one that suggests it is time to buy. But again, this measure is debatable. Critics argue that bond yields have been artificially depressed by the Bank of England's money printing programme. The yield on the Footsie has exceeded the UK gilt yield for most of 2011 with little sign of it triggering a rally.

One other measure which has its supporters is to take the price-to-earnings ratio and smooth out the effects of the business cycle by taking an average over a decade. This is known as the cyclically-adjusted price-to-earnings ratio (CAPE).

It's hard to get this ratio for the UK but U.S. broker Andrew Smithers of Smithers & Co has a reputation for producing a regular valuation for the American market. In September, his calculations suggested it was 38 per cent over-valued.

But even this method has its flaws - and its critics. CNN journalist Jeffrey Westmount points out some holes in it here.

UK broker Brewin Dolphin said today: 'Our expectation of how well the equity markets can do in 2012 is limited but we are still hopeful that the FTSE 100 will end 2012 at around 5850. Much will depend on what progress emerges on the eurozone’s ‘fiscal compact’. However, we also expect equity markets to gain support from a more encouraging outlook for the US economy.'